Adams County officials hear consultant on Senate Bill 1, weigh gradual local income tax changes

Adams County council members and commissioners spent more than an hour on a presentation about Senate Bill 1 and its likely effects on county property-tax revenue and local income-tax (LIT) structure, then opened a public hearing and asked the consultant to provide phased scenarios to reduce a county property-tax relief credit ahead of a 2028 state deadline.

The consultant, Jason Simmer, told the board that Senate Bill 1 will cut assessed value for many homesteads, rental and agricultural properties and change the way business personal property is treated, all of which will shrink the county tax base over time. “One of the goals ... was to reduce property taxes,” Simmer said during his presentation.

Simmer laid out examples showing how larger homestead deductions, a supplemental credit (the lesser of $300 or 10% of a taxpayer’s bill), and new deductions for 2%- and 3%-class properties could reduce assessed values countywide and, absent offsetting growth, raise tax rates and circuit-breaker losses. He illustrated hypothetical impacts on a $240,000 home and on Adams County’s certified levy: the county’s net assessed base was shown as about $2,000,000,000 for 2025, and Simmer modeled an illustrative 20% tax-base decline that would require a materially higher rate to maintain projected levy growth.

Councils and commissioners then discussed the concurrent changes to local income tax (LIT). Simmer described the statutory overhaul that will shift many LIT adoption decisions to county councils (beginning in 2027), consolidate multiple LIT buckets into a county-controlled general rate (up to 1.2%), and leave municipalities and special districts to request distributions from the county rather than automatically receiving certified shares.

Council members asked about timing and taxpayer impacts if the county eliminated the county’s current property-tax relief credit (the PTRC) now versus phasing it out. No formal vote was taken to change rates; instead, the body agreed to request more detailed, parcel-level scenarios from Simmer and staff to map how a gradual reduction of the 0.29 percentage-point PTRC would affect several typical taxpayers (homestead in town, homestead in township, farmland, and commercial properties). Simmer agreed to provide scenarios and examples and to send them to county staff ahead of an August 1 notice deadline so towns and other taxing units can be notified if the county moves forward.

During the hearing, council members repeatedly emphasized smoothing the transition for residents outside towns who are not currently at statutory caps, and stressed that any local action should consider the phase-in of the assessment changes in 2026–2031. Multiple participants urged that decisions avoid large, abrupt tax increases for rural residents. The board directed staff to notify municipalities if the county pursues changes and asked the consultant to present a set of alternative schedules (for example: no change, partial reduction in year one and year two, and a full elimination) with estimated revenue, taxpayer examples and sensitivity ranges.

No ordinance or tax-rate change was adopted at the meeting. The council and commissioners agreed to reconvene with the consultant’s analyses in August/September, and staff said they will prepare draft ordinances for consideration before the statutory deadlines for public notice and final votes.

The discussion also included reminders that local budget growth allowances, interest income and American Rescue Plan balances affect near-term county finances, and that shifting revenue from property tax to LIT would change the county’s revenue volatility profile.

Ending: County leaders closed the public hearing without adopting a change and asked staff and the consultant to return with multiple modeled options that aim to smooth the fiscal transition for residents and taxing units ahead of the 2028 statutory changes.